Teachable Moment: That's why you go for two early

KingintheNorth

Chris in Arizona
Messages
17,308
Reaction score
23,649
yeah, so if the success rate for two point conversions since the NFL adopted it in 1994 is 48%, what statistically significant variable/s existed at 4:57 when MM went for two that didn’t exist (or vice versa) if he had waited to go for two with say, 10 seconds in the game?

be very specific on your quantifiable methodology lol


If your argument is that the chances of a successful 2-point try are comparable or similar to a those of a coin toss...sure.

But saying a 2-point try is no different than coin toss is incorrect. There is literally no skill involved a successful heads or tails result from a coin toss.
 

GhostOfPelluer

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,389
Reaction score
5,309
Oh lord, no.

It's about possessions. It's always about possessions. You have the opportunity to turn the game into a one possession game, you do it. Every time without fail.

Atlanta intentionally gave us that game. One of the best receivers ever dropped a perfectly thrown TD pass, then 5 Falcons stood around a spinning ball and allowed us to win the game.

If you had that same scenario 1,000 more times, Dallas would lose 1,000 times.
You're 100% certain that an 8 point game is a one-possession game?
 

Trajan

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,292
Reaction score
1,713
LOL so you don’t make it and STILL LEAVE YOURSELF DOWN TWO SCORES......BRILLIANT!!!

That’s why you DON’T go for 2 there. You take the sure point to make it a 1 score game.

And if you don't make the final 2 pt conversion on the last play you are still down but with less time to overcome this. I would rather be down with time to react then down with the game being over or a few seconds for an onside kick and then a score.
 

CarolinaFathead

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,887
Reaction score
2,334
LOL so you don’t make it and STILL LEAVE YOURSELF DOWN TWO SCORES......BRILLIANT!!!

That’s why you DON’T go for 2 there. You take the sure point to make it a 1 score game.
LOL so you don’t make it and STILL LEAVE YOURSELF DOWN TWO SCORES......BRILLIANT!!!

That’s why you DON’T go for 2 there. You take the sure point to make it a 1 score game.

yeah?

so after making it a one score game (it’s not lmao. It’s still a touchdown and two point conversion away from a tie. That’s called TWO scores) what are the chances of success of the two point conversion we have to get if MM waits to attempt it with say, 30 seconds in the game versus 4:57 when he actually had the team attempt it?
 

joseephuss

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,896
Reaction score
6,803
Oh boy.

First of all, of course. Down 15 points with 5 minutes left, you're almost certainly going to lose no matter what you do.

Secondly, an 8-point game is not a one-possession game. It might be, but there's a 50% chance it's a two-possession game. You don't know how many possessions you need when you're 8 points down. Dallas had the opportunity to turn it into a 7-point game, a true one-possession game, and they took it. Didn't work, but at least they knew what to do next. If they kicked the xp and failed the two-pointer at the end, game over.

But you assume that if you kick and convert that XP, that you just go into some sort of slow down mode. They still needed to stop the Falcons quickly and score. They would have known what to do no matter what decision they made and they would always remain in a hurry up situation on both sides of the ball. No decision changes that.
 

CarolinaFathead

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,887
Reaction score
2,334
If your argument is that the chances of a successful 2-point try are comparable or similar to a those of a coin toss...sure.

But saying a 2-point try is no different than coin toss is incorrect. There is literally no skill involved a successful heads or tails result from a coin toss.

That is my argument. I chose a poorly framed sentence to convey that. That’s my bad. It’s analogous to a coin toss, not exactly the same.
 

Beaker42

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,050
Reaction score
7,366
The benefit of the information you get by going early far far outweighs the fringe possibilities of a safety on the kickoff or...I actually can't think of any other situations where it would be better the other way.
99.99% of all football coaches get to within one score by kicking the PAT. You have no way of knowing if you’re going to get one more possession let alone 2. It’s asinine to leave yourself down 2 scores by going for 8 and coming away w/ 6.
 

CarolinaFathead

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,887
Reaction score
2,334
99.99% of all football coaches get to within one score by kicking the PAT. You have no way of knowing if you’re going to get one more possession let alone 2. It’s asinine to leave yourself down 2 scores by going for 8 and coming away w/ 6.

Yeah? Given that you don’t know if you’re going to get the ball back, which is true, just imagine if MM kicked an XP instead of attempting 2 pt conversion and Dallas didn’t get the ball back. what’s the score at the end of the game? Does Dallas win?

And being down 7 or 8 points is still down two scores.

this isn’t hard.
 

CarolinaFathead

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,887
Reaction score
2,334
But you assume that if you kick and convert that XP, that you just go into some sort of slow down mode. They still needed to stop the Falcons quickly and score. They would have known what to do no matter what decision they made and they would always remain in a hurry up situation on both sides of the ball. No decision changes that.

yes but the strategy MM employed managed the game time most efficiently and maximized Dallas’ chances of winning the game.
 

Beaker42

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,050
Reaction score
7,366
And if you don't make the final 2 pt conversion on the last play you are still down but with less time to overcome this. I would rather be down with time to react then down with the game being over or a few seconds for an onside kick and then a score.
Sorry not following - you agree or no with me saying make it a 1-score game there?
 

JD_KaPow

jimnabby
Messages
11,035
Reaction score
10,803
But you assume that if you kick and convert that XP, that you just go into some sort of slow down mode. They still needed to stop the Falcons quickly and score. They would have known what to do no matter what decision they made and they would always remain in a hurry up situation on both sides of the ball. No decision changes that.
No. Here are the options:

1. Go for 2 early, succeed. You're down 7. Great. Your best strategy is to slow things down on your next drive (or at least not rush). Ideally, you leave very little time on the clock for the Falcons to have a last-second FG drive in regulation.
2. Go for 2 early, fail. You're down 9. Bummer. You have to go fast fast fast to have any chance.
3. Kick XP early. You're down 8. You don't know what your best strategy is. Every team I've ever seen in this situation plays it slow and tries to score with little time left, thereby pinning everything on the 2-pointer. It's a good strategy if you end up making the 2-pointer. It's a bad strategy if you end up missing it. But you simply don't know what your best approach is, because you don't know how the 2-pointer is going to turn out. Much better to know in advance.

Your argument boils down to "it makes no difference when you try the two-pointer." And that's possible. But trying it early definitely isn't a worse option.
 

joseephuss

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,896
Reaction score
6,803
yes but the strategy MM employed managed the game time most efficiently and maximized Dallas’ chances of winning the game.

As I pointed out, if he made the so called "wrong" decision and went for the XP and missed they would have been in the exact same position. And being down the most points possible at that moment didn't maximize anything. His decision wasn't wrong, but none of the other options would have been wrong decisions, either. They are just decisions.
 

JD_KaPow

jimnabby
Messages
11,035
Reaction score
10,803
99.99% of all football coaches get to within one score by kicking the PAT.
Over the last 5 years, it's actually around 2/3.

You have no way of knowing if you’re going to get one more possession let alone 2. It’s asinine to leave yourself down 2 scores by going for 8 and coming away w/ 6.
It's not about how many possessions you're going to get: you have no control over that. It's about how many possessions you're going to need. And you don't know the answer to that until you know how the 2-pointer worked out. Why wait to get that critical piece of information? Why not get that information now?

Calling an 8-point game a one-possession game doesn't magically make it one. It's only a one-possession game 50% of the time.
 

JD_KaPow

jimnabby
Messages
11,035
Reaction score
10,803
As I pointed out, if he made the so called "wrong" decision and went for the XP and missed they would have been in the exact same position. And being down the most points possible at that moment didn't maximize anything. His decision wasn't wrong, but none of the other options would have been wrong decisions, either. They are just decisions.
I completely disagree, because I've watched football teams who were down 8 points with 2-3 minutes left. They do not approach it the way the Cowboys approached that drive Sunday. They approach it as if they were down 7, and take it slow. The information really does change the strategy.
 

CarolinaFathead

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,887
Reaction score
2,334
As I pointed out, if he made the so called "wrong" decision and went for the XP and missed they would have been in the exact same position. And being down the most points possible at that moment didn't maximize anything. His decision wasn't wrong, but none of the other options would have been wrong decisions, either. They are just decisions.

The efficiency of MM’s decision is shown via time management. The amount of time we had after recovering the onside kick, which was so plentiful that we didn’t need to press AT ALL to drive for a FG was a direct result of MM going for two.

MM didn’t know after we scored at 4:57 when we were going to score again. This is very important to take note of and understand. As it played out we scored with 1:49 left in the game to bring us within 2 points but MM didn’t know that at 4:57. It could just as easily have played out that we scored with 15 seconds left in the game and failed to convert the 2 point conversion. That means we lose the game. It’s also of note that if we chose to go 8 points down instead of trying to cut the lead to 7 it would have absolutely affected how time was managed once Dallas got back in the red zone. At that point you’re playing to milk the clock so that ATL doesn’t get the ball back with time to do something which means having the game come down to a 50/50 2 point conversion with no back up plan if it fails. Going for two at 4:57 gave us a viable back up plan if it failed - an onside kick. Sure it’s not great but it’s better than the game being over because we let the game come down to a play with odds similar to a coin toss. If you know you need the conversion then you go for it as soon as you feasibly can.

By going for two when he did MM was leaving open more viable paths to victory. It was clearly the right call.
 
Last edited:

lostar2009

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,861
Reaction score
3,479
Good lord no. Going for it early is playing the percentages.

The chances of making the two-point conversion are the same early or late. There's no benefit to waiting. None. People who study the percentages of football have been screaming about this for years.

If you really look at it the percentage may actually drop. You have a Atlanta who will field their best play and player on a final attempt.
 

joseephuss

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,896
Reaction score
6,803
The efficiency of MM’s decision is shown via time management. The amount of time we had after recovering the onside kick, which was so plentiful that we didn’t need to press AT ALL to drive for a FG was a direct result of MM going for two.

MM didn’t know after we scored at 4:57 when we were going to score again. This is very important to take note of and understand. As it played out we scored with 1:49 left in the game to bring us within 2 points but MM didn’t know that at 4:57. It could just as easily have played out that we scored with 15 seconds left in the game and failed to convert the 2 point conversion. That means we lose the game.

By going for two when he did MM was leaving open more viable paths to victory. It was clearly the right call.

And had he made the "wrong" call and gone for the XP and missed, they are still in the same exact situation. I have no problem with the decision, but it isn't some grand choice. It was a decision. They had many hurdles to go to win that game no matter what decision they made at that time.
 
Top